Debate Club

Is the Cordray Appointment Constitutional? >

Legal and Historical Precedent Are on Obama's Side

"Appointments Clause" of the U.S. Constitution authorizes president to make recess appointments

January 6, 2012

About David Arkush:

David Arkush is the director of the Congress Watch division of Public Citizen. Arkush is an expert in public financing of elections, open government, lobbying and ethics reform, court secrecy, federal preemption of state law and binding mandatory arbitration in consumer contracts.

Yes, President Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is constitutional. The "Appointments Clause" of the U.S. Constitution authorizes the president to fill positions with temporary appointees while the Senate is on recess:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

[Follow U.S. News Debate Club on Twitter.]

Because he is a temporary, recess appointee, Cordray's term will expire at the end of 2013 rather than 2016.

One might argue that the president can use the appointment power only for positions that open up during a recess (it's ambiguous whether "that may happen" modifies only the word "Vacancies" or also the phrase "during the Recess"). But no one is making that argument. Since the country was founded, the legislative and executive branch have recognized recess appointments to positions that became available while the Senate was in session. George Washington made that type of appointment in 1789. This is for good reason. If the point is to make sure that important positions can be filled quickly, then why permit a recess appointment to a critical position that opens up the day after the Senate adjourns but not one that opens up a day earlier?

[See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

Instead, some claim that the current recess--which they say is three days long--is too short for recess appointments. This argument is mistaken for two reasons. First, there's a strong argument that the current recess is roughly five weeks long, not three days. The Senate left town in December and won't resume business until January 23. A single senator has shown up once every three days to bang the gavel, declare the Senate in session, then declare it adjourned. Despite these theatrical performances, the Senate isn't actually open for business. It is not available to fulfill its "advice and consent" role. So if a court ever hears a challenge to Cordray's appointment, it might decide that the Senate was really on a five-week recess when he was appointed.

But even if a court viewed the current recess as only three days long, the opposition still falls short. As you might have noticed, the Appointments Clause doesn't set a minimum time period for a recess. A federal appeals court that looked at the question recognized the obvious: The Constitution doesn't set a minimum time period, and courts shouldn't make one up. In addition, two other presidents--Harry S. Truman and Theodore Roosevelt--have made appointments during recess of three days or shorter. Legal and historical precedent are both on President Obama's side.

Tags:
Republican Party,
consumers,
Congress,
Barack Obama,
Obama administration
Other Arguments
#1

No — Constitution is clear on the Cordray matter; the president's actions must not stand

PHIL KERPEN, Vice President for Policy at Americans for Prosperity

#2

No — Obama's purported recess appointments are unconstitutional and unprecedented

ELIZABETH GARVEY, Legal Policy Analyst in the Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal & Judicial Studies

#3

No — What's next? Appointing executive branch officials when the Senate is taking a lunch or bathroom break?

JOHN BERLAU, Director of the Center for Investors and Entrepreneurs at the Competitive Enterprise Institute

#5

Yes — President right to appoint Cordray, block Republican assault on the rule of law

IAN MILLHISER, Policy Analyst with the Center for American Progress and Editor of ThinkProgress Justice

#6

Yes — Few are raising the objection that Richard Cordray is unqualified for the post

REID CRAMER, Director of the Asset Building Program at the New America Foundation

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
President Obama's Code Pink Heckler Medea Benjamin Was Plain Rude

It's become acceptable for people to interrupt the president while he is delivering a formal speech on a deadly serious topic.

Obama Commerce Nominee Penny Pritzker’s Tax Problem

Obama’s Commerce Department nominee has some Romney-esque tax issues.

Oklahoma Tornado Reminds Us of the Value of Teachers

The Oklahoma tornado reminds us of all the roles teachers take on.

IRS, AP and James Rosen Scandals Strike at the First Amendment

The Obama scandals paint a picture of an administration at odds with the First Amendment.

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Advertisement